Abstract: This letter calls on the authorities to
reconsider the opening up of 3 reservoirs in the central
catchment area / nature reserve for fishing, and proposes
alternatives which pose less of a threat to nature and the
environment.

Dear
Sirs/Mdms,

Firstly i
appologise that this letter is so long-winded. Given the urgency of
the situation, I did not want to delay and spend more time editing
it.

With regards to
the Straits Times article "Okay
to fish at 3 more reservoirs"
(ST Dec 17, 2000) I would like to suggest that the authorities
seriously reconsider this.

I am an avid
angler and go fishing at least twice a week, and as such, I welcome
the willingness on the part of the authorities to further the sport
of fishing in Singapore. Some anglers are happy that MacRitchie,
Lower Peirce, and Upper Seletar reservoirs are being opened for
fishing, but others, including myself, feel that this is not a
good idea.

This is because
the central catchment area cum nature reserve is the very last
stronghold of most of our native aquatic plant and animal species,
many of which are rare or endangered. Already over
40% of the native fish fauna of Singapore has become
extinct1,
and we need to make more effort to preserve whatever is left of our
formerly much richer, but still very rich, biodiversity.

Singapore has an
ever-increasing human population and an ever-shrinking area of
natural habitat. Because of this the native flora and fauna are under
a lot of pressure and the uncontrolled exploitation of fish stocks in
the reservoirs is unlikely to be sustainable.

In Kranji and
Seletar, I and other long time anglers have noticed a very drastic
decline in the population of snakeheads, walking catfish, and other
once abundant species including even such fast-breeding introduced
species as tilapia (Note to ST Forum editor: search your
database of ST news articles from the 1980's, there are some which
mention the big catches in those days at Kranji and Seletar. Try also
including "toman" and "tilapia" in the search). This trend cannot be
totally blamed on anglers as other environmental factors are
involved, but overfishing is certainly an important factor,
particular for species like snakeheads, which in addition to being
much sought-after by anglers, do not reproduce at a very high
rate.

Furthermore, as
I understand it, the central catchment area reservoirs are our main
source of drinking water (most other reservoirs are used for
industrial water), and if the ecology of the reservoirs is disturbed,
this can have detrimental effects on water quality which may increase
the cost of water treatment, and also pose a threat to public
health.

POTENTIAL
ADVERSE EFFECTS OF FISHING IN THE CENTRAL RESERVOIRS

Allowing fishing
in the reservoirs can potentially have the following negative
effects:

1.
INTRODUCTION OF NON-INDIGINOUS AQUATIC ORGANISMS.
This is my single greatest concern. Although the use of live bait is
prohibited, in practice it will be very hard to ensure 100%
compliance with this and some anglers will still use live bait.
Anglers may catch small fishes from other places or may purchase them
from aquarium shops and bring them to the reservoirs to use as bait.
Many of these fish may be species that are non-native to Singapore,
and they may escape and establish breeding populations in those
reservoirs. They may also carry diseases, parasites,
and other organisms that may also become introduced to our reservoirs
2.

An even more
likely scenario is that, if fishing is allowed there, anglers will be
motivated to introduce foreign fish species that they wish to catch
into those reservoirs (it is illegal to do so but they will still do
it). This has been done in many countries with disastrous ecological
consequences. It has already happened in Singapore
with the introduction of South American peacock bass, and it is
rumoured, North American largemouth bass into some of our reservoirs.
The ecological impact of these and other recent non-native fish
introductions has yet to be ascertained 3.

The introduction
of non-indigenous species can very seriously impact native organisms,
pushing some species to extinction. It can also dramatically alter
food web interactions and nutrient cycles, thus causing imbalances in
the ecosystem, which can badly affect water quality in the
reservoirs. Here are two examples:

Lake
Victoria, Africa: Nile Perch, a fish not native to the lake,
was introduced in the 1960's in an attempt to improve sport and
commercial fisheries. Its population in the lake remained dormant
until the 1980's when it exploded. The result was an ecological
disaster.

"Lake
Victoria is in danger of becoming the world's largest pool of dead
water. Already half its native fish are extinct, and the 30
million people who eke out a living from its troubled waters are
facing calamity" 4.

Because of the
ecological damage, the lake water, which was formerly very clear, has
become very murky with algae and much of it has become so devoid of
oxygen due to rotting algae that no fish can live in it.

Apple
snails in Southeast Asia5:
In the 1980's, apple snails (Pomacea) from South America were
introduced to Taiwan to start a snail farming industry. However, the
foreign snails were not popular as food, and also proved capable of
carrying a local parasitic worm that infects humans. Instead of
becoming a profitable aquaculture product, the snails infested paddy
fields, where they posed a real threat to rice production and the
environment in general. The snails rapidly spread to Indonesia,
Vietnam, Laos, Cambodia, Thailand, Hong Kong, South Korea, southern
China, Japan, the Philippines, Hawaii (where they are a major pest in
the cultivation of taro, the staple food there), Malaysia, Papua New
Guinea, and Australia. They have thus become a threat to food
production in Southeast Asia.

These foreign
apple snails are also found in parts of Singapore where they eat up
all the water plants. Water plants take up dissolved nutrients
(nitrate, phosphate, etc) and give out oxygen, and with the water
plants gone, the nutrients cause algal blooms which makes the water
turbid, low in oxygen, and bad smelling. In addition the plants are
vital as habitats, breeding places, and food for a whole host of
aquatic animals including many species of fish, and their removal
seriously damages the entire aquatic ecosystem.

2. DIRECT
IMPACT ON NATIVE FISH POPULATIONS:
The native fish populations in our reservoirs are fragile and should
be safeguarded. They are already under pressure from introduced
aquatic species (via competition, direct predation, and drastic food
web changes) as well as environmental factors such as excessive water
plant clearance. Having anglers fishing them out will add yet another
source of pressure on their dwindling populations. This problem can
be lessened if anglers release native fish that they catch instead of
taking them home to eat. Anglers should be educated and encouraged to
release native fish and keep only the introduced non-native
ones.

3. HEAVY
METAL POLLUTION:
Fishing weights commonly sold in tackle shops are mostly made of
lead. Some artificial lures, notably jigs and certain spinners, also
have lead components. Lead is not very soluble in water, but the
water in the central catchment reservoirs is probably slightly acidic
(given the geology and soils of the area and the acid water streams
that feed into the reservoirs) and may dissolve small amounts of lead
off sinkers and other tackle. Over time very many pieces of
lead-containing tackle will be lost to snags in the reservoir (I have
personally collected many lost lead sinkers from the fishing area at
Lower Seletar reservoir) and the amount of lead in drinking water may
increase to levels which may pose a threat to public health
(especially that of children, who suffer brain damage and decreased
IQ from long term exposure to even low levels of lead). In other
countries, alternative tackle is available, such as split shots which
do not contain lead, but to my knowledge such un-leaded tackle is not
yet available in local tackle shops.As an aside, the three SAF rifle ranges in the Nee
Soon area, which is in the water catchment area of Lower Seletar
reservoir, are another possible source of heavy metal contamination.
In other countries, the soil from rifle ranges is treated as toxic
waste because of its high lead content6,
and it is advisable for the authorities (ENV / PUB) to test the water
in streams and drains near weapons ranges for lead, antimony,
mercury, cadmium, zinc, and other heavy metals used in the
manufacture of ammunition.

4.
LITTER:
Another danger is lost or discarded nylon fishing line. It takes many
years to break down, and it poses a risk to wildlife, especially when
it is tangled. Animals become entangled in it and die. It is
especially dangerous to wading birds, tortoises, and monitor lizards,
which may get their legs or necks stuck in the loops of tangled line.
This is a problem anywhere that fishing takes place, not just in the
reservoirs. It can be minimised if anglers take more care to properly
dispose of tangled line instead of littering. The existing
anti-litter laws should be strictly enforced to deter littering by
errant anglers.

ALTERNATIVE
PROPOSALS

Instead of
allowing fishing in the central catchment area reservoirs I suggest
that the authorities take the following steps to further the sport of
fishing in Singapore, whilst protecting our environment and
biodiversity for the sake of all Singaporeans, anglers or
otherwise:

1. OPEN UP
LESS ECOLOGICALLY SENSITIVE WATER BODIES AS FISHING SPOTS,
instead of allowing fishing in the nature reserves. Such places
include:

Bedok
reservoir, Pandan reservoir, Yishun stormwater collection pond,
more parts of Jurong lake, and Tengeh reservoir. These
reservoirs do not have any rare or endangered native fish as far
as I am aware, and most are dominated by fast-breeding non-native
fish. Furthermore, if I am not mistaken most of these reservoirs
are not used for drinking water so anglers should be allowed to
use natural bait there as it doesn't pose a public health risk.
See the appendix
to this article for a discussion of natural versus artificial
bait.

The
former fishing ponds in Punggol Park and Bishan Park. These
were formerly leased to commercial fishing pond operators who
charged very high fees and have now gone out of business. Nparks
has now banned fishing in these ponds for no apparent reason.
There is a shortage of fishing ponds where children can learn the
basics of fishing with inexpensive tackle (handlines, bamboo
poles, bent pins baited with earthworms, not expensive rods and
reels and artificial lures which kids can hardly afford) in
Singapore and these ponds are ideal places for families to go
fishing with their kids. They are overpopulated with fast-breeding
introduced tilapia and mayan cichlids, which readily take any
bait, and which will not go extinct from overfishing. Fishing with
natural bait should be permitted here.

2. DEVELOP
EXISTING WATERCOURSES FOR MULTIPLE USES.

In 1977 Prime
Minister Lee Kuan Yew said:

"It
should be a way of life to keep the water clean, to keep every
stream, every culvert, every rivulet, free from unnecessary
pollution. The Ministry of Environment should make a target: in
ten years let us have fishing in the Singapore River and fishing
in the Kallang River. It can be done"7.

In spite of
this, it appears that streams, canals, rivers and drains, are at
present viewed and treated only as means of draining away precious
freshwater as fast as possible. Their roles as potential habitats for
aquatic life, as aesthetic landscape features, and as places for
recreational fishing, do not appear to have been taken into account.
As a result, many streams, rivers, and drains that once supported a
thriving community of aquatic life have been transformed into
lifeless concrete drains by "drainage improvement works."

Reducing
unnecessary pollution is indeed a good and necessary thing, but fish
and other aquatic organisms need more than clean water. All
organisms, including humans -- though we seem to have forgotten it,
need to live in a balance with the rest of nature. In addition to
not-too-dirty water, fish need a functioning aquatic ecosystem. They
need to be part of a working food web, they need suitable hiding,
spawning and nursery habitats, and they cannot survive in drains that
are usually dry, or those with very fast flowing water and no shelter
from the strong current, or covered drains with no
sunlight.

Some
suggestions to make water courses more multi-functional in
land-scarce Singapore8:

Where
possible, earth-banked streams and rivers should be left
earth-banked and not concretised. Excessive clearing of water
plants should be avoided.

If bank
support is necessary to prevent erosion, then use breathable
concrete slabs with holes in them, on sloping banks, like the
banks of the Kallang river upstream of Kallang MRT station. The
holes provide places where aquatic organisms can burrow and
live.

Mud and sand
deposits should not be dredged away unnecessarily, as these are
very important habitats for invertebrates, which are an important
part of the aquatic food web. Mud banks are an indispensable
physical component of the estuary ecosystem, and estuaries are
vital for the marine ecosystem as well as being highly productive
ecosystems in their own right.

Mangrove
and attap trees could be planted along suitable river and canal
banks to improve the aesthetics of the river and to provide
shelter and food for birds, fish, and other
animals9.

Vertical
concrete walls should be avoided as far as possible. Vertical
sided canals and drains are death traps for terrestrial animals
that fall in and cannot climb out. Dogs, cats, small mammals,
toads, and even people have fallen in and died because they could
not climb out of vertical-sided canals.

Many small
concrete drains used to exist which had conditions capable of
supporting at least some fish and wildlife. These conditions
included permanent water flowing at a slow rate, cracked sections
or holes in the concrete, accumulated sand, dead leaves, or other
natural substrate. Such drains typically had populations of
guppies, toad and frog tadpoles, walking catfish, swamp eels,
snakeheads, dragonfly nymphs, and sometimes soft-shelled turtles.
They were excellent places for children to scoop "drain fish" and
thus interact and learn about nature. Unfortunately most such
drains have now been renovated and covered over by "drainage
improvement schemes" which often seem unnecessary to me. However,
suitable small drains can be purposely designed and modified to
support fish and other wildlife and to allow easy access to
children.

As Mr Lee said
in 1977, "it can be done".

APPENDIX:
THE BAIT DEBATE

There have
recently been a few articles in the Straits Times (most recently
"Hook
the fish, but watch your baits,"
Dec 18, 2000) about people using live or dead bait -- natural bait --
in reservoirs, which is currently illegal. I shall now discuss the
pros and cons of allowing natural versus artificial bait in
reservoirs.

FROM AN
ANGLER'S POINT OF VIEW:
In most freshwater fishing locations, and for most species of fish,
natural bait, whether live or dead, produces much higher bite and
hook-up rates as fish are attracted by the smell and texture of the
real thing, and will bite it and hold on instead of spitting it out
immediately. Artificial bait is usually much less effective, and also
much more expensive to buy. Some anglers enjoy the challenge and
skill of fishing with artificial bait, but others prefer a more
relaxed style of fishing and also enjoy catching more fish rather
than spending the whole day casting lures, sometimes without getting
even a single bite. The skill, patience, physical exertion, low catch
rate, and the expensive tackle needed for lure fishing are all
factors that may discourage children and novice anglers and put them
off the sport of fishing. Thus, from an angler's point of view, both
artificial and natural baits should be allowed as much as possible in
order to cater to a wider range of fishing techniques and angler
preferences.

FROM AN
ENVIRONMENTAL / CONSERVATION POINT OF VIEW:
Different types of natural bait pose different degrees of risk to the
environment of a reservoir:

Warm-blooded
animals carry more bacterial and viral diseases that can be passed
on to humans than cold-blooded ones, so things like pig and
chicken liver pose the greatest risk to public health (see for
example the recent food scares involving Malaysian pigs, Hong Kong
chickens, and EU beef). The water treatment process will filter
out or kill most of the disease organisms but its better to be
safe and have less of them in the water to begin with. Thus, birds
and mammals, live or dead, in whole or in part, should not be
allowed as bait in drinking water reservoirs.

Anglers
often use live fish, live frogs, live insects, live prawns, and
earthworms as bait. Some of these creatures will escape and
survive and possible breed in the reservoir. Some of these will be
species that are already found naturally in the nature reserve so
this will cause no harm to the ecosystem. However some of them may
be non-native species which can wreak havoc on the local ecosystem
if they become established here. This is especially true of fish
and frogs because many foreign species are imported live for the
aquarium or food trade. Some of these have become established in
Singapore, but not yet in the central nature reserve, and they may
become established there via bait bucket releases. Foreign animals
may also carry foreign diseases that may infect local ones. As
such, with the possible exception of earthworms, insects, and
small freshwater shrimps (all of which occur naturally in or
around the reservoirs), no live bait should be allowed in the
nature reserve area. In the case of live fish and frogs, another
possible argument against their use is that they are vertebrates
with well-developed brains, and may thus experience more
unnecessary emotional distress from being used as
bait.

Anglers also
use dead bait, mainly bread, dough, and pieces of fish or prawn.
Leaving aside pig and chicken organs already discussed above; dead
baits pose the least risk to public health and the environment
among natural baits. As such, they could conceivably be allowed in
reservoirs without any adverse environmental impact.

Artificial
bait is not without its problems. Unlike natural baits, lures made
of plastic and metal are non-biodegradable. When they are lost to
snags, they will persist for a very long time without breaking
down. In addition, some types contain lead or other toxic
chemicals, which may pose a public health risk if they end up in
drinking water. Then again, lead weights are also used by natural
bait anglers. If it is found that lead does dissolve in reservoir
water, all lead-containing terminal tackle should be banned.
Fishing tackle shops should be encouraged to sell "un-leaded"
tackle.

The best
thing is not to allow fishing at all in the central catchment /
nature reserve area.

SOME
FURTHER COMMENTS ON THE STRAITS TIMES ARTICLES:

The articles
tended to focus on the potential for natural bait to "dirty the
water". However, I doubt that this will be a problem as the
amount of natural bait put in by anglers is very small compared to
the size of the reservoir. It will be quickly eaten up by fish
(bait is, after all, meant to be eaten by fish), prawns, and other
scavengers and detritivores, and the amount of nutrients and
biomass entering the reservoir in the form of bait will be more
than balanced by the amount removed from it in the form of fish
taken home by anglers. There will be a net removal of nutrients
and biomass from the reservoirs, because the fish removed are
bigger than the bait used to catch them.

The Straits
Times articles about fishing in reservoirs also use the term
"sport fishing" as though it refers to fishing using
artificial bait as opposed to natural bait. This is not so. "Sport
fishing" refers to angling carried out for the purpose of sport,
as opposed to subsistence fishing (fishing for food), or
commercial fishing (fishing for profit). It has got nothing to do
with the type of bait used. "Sport fishing" is almost synonymous
with "recreational fishing" (for example see: http://www.dfg.ca.gov/fishing/econ.sptfsh.html)
but perhaps carries a slight nuance of being more competitive and
requiring more effort and skill, whereas "recreational fishing"
sounds more laid-back and relaxed. I can think of no easy-to-use
term which fully and perfectly encapsulates the meaning of fishing
using artificial bait as opposed to natural bait, but perhaps
"lure fishing" or "fishing using artificials" comes closest. For
legal definitions of "sport fishing" see:http://gcc.ca/Political-Issues/jbnqa/section_24_hunting1.htmhttp://www.nwn.noaa.gov/sites/nwnmfs/1sustfsh/fhalhq.htmhttp://www.akcache.com/akcache/akfreg.html
and search for the phrase "sport fishing means" on the above
pages.

2.At least two new species of freshwater clam
(identified by Chan Sow-Yan as Anodonta woodiana, and
Pilsbryoconcha exilis) have established themselves in several
of our reservoirs via parasitic larvae attached to introduced fish,
probably imported from Taiwan, Thailand, or Indonesia. Freshwater
clams have caused problems in a neighbouring country where their
shells have clogged up pipes in water treatment plants.

3.Over the last 7 years many new species of
non-indigenous fish have established themselves in Singapore waters,
including:

Peacock Bass
(Cichla spp.) from South America, now present in most
reservoirs.

From personal
anecdotal observations, the rise in the variety, quantity, and
geographical spread of many of these new introduced species has
coincided with a corresponding decrease in the abundance of native or
long established fish species, and in some cases a very dramatic
reduction in total fish abundance (all species) and also other
ecological changes like loss of water weed beds and growth of algal
mats. Whether there is a causal relationship, and if so what it is,
between the spread of exotics and the observed changes in our water
bodies, has yet to be established by scientific studies. However I am
not aware of any recent scientific studies on the impact of exotics
in Singapore, and it is also a problem that most Singaporeans,
including the relevant authorities, seem unaware of. Many of these
species are imported for the aquarium or food trade and then released
into the wild when owners get tired of them, or for religious
merit-gaining purposes. I just got a pack of leaflets called a
"Pet Starter Kit," published by the Primary Production
Department, which has some basic advice for pet owners, but makes no
mention of the problem of introduced non-indigenous
animals.

Army aims for
eco-friendly ammunitionhttp://seattlep-i.nwsource.com/national/lead23.shtml
Mentions the threat that lead bullets on training ranges pose to
drinking water. Gets much public relations milage out of a new
lead-free tungsten bullet. I suspect that the real reason for the new
bullet is its improved armour penetration capabilities and not the
army's concern for the environment.

8.Designing waterways to have more functions than
just draining away water is not a new idea in Singapore, it has been
mooted in various publications including a government publication,
The Singapore Green Plan (published by the Ministry of the
Environment, 1992). The Green Plan states on page 11: "We have
developed a comprehensive drainage system to stamp out ubiquitous
flooding. A ten-year Clean River Campaign, completed at a cost of
$200 million has brought back aquatic life to the Singapore River and
Kallang Basin. The open drains and canals will however, no longer
just be functional infrastructure. They will be modified and upgraded
to aesthetic waterways to allow for recreational activities in some
of the larger streams." However, the things I see going on make
me wonder if the government has since changed its mind and decided
not to fully implement the Green Plan. See also:

Singapore:
Singapore Green Plan: towards a model green city, 1992http://igc-vif-215.igc.org/wdces/si92_670.html
The abstract mentions that part of the plan is to "convert open
drains and canals into recreational waterways." However I see little
evidence of this having been done.

Natural Resource
Aspects of Sustainable Development in Singaporehttp://www.un.org/esa/agenda21/natlinfo/countr/singapor/natur.htm
This Local Agenda 21 report mentions a "Waterbodies Design Panel:
Members from various agencies work to enhance the aesthetic and
recreational potential of waterways to turn canals running through
urbanised areas into richly landscaped rivers, enhancing the
residential developments along them." If such a panel really
exists, I can see little evidence of their work so far. Natural water
courses continue to be turned into unsightly vertical-sided concrete
drains or even completely covered over, and existing old concrete
drains which have been sufficiently weathered and worn so that they
can support diverse fish life continue to be "upgraded" which in
practice means that they are degraded ecologically.

Green Plan aims
to make Singapore model environment city by 2000http://www.recyclingpoint.com.sg/Articles/1991Nov15GreenPlan.htm
This 1991 article mentions that one aspect of the Green Plan is
"Upgrading canals and rivers and improving the quality of water in
them to encourage aquatic life and recreational activities... ...
Modify and upgrade larger streams into 'aesthetic' water bodies with
high quality water". However, it is now the year 2000, and there
are very much fewer rivers and canals capable of supporting aquatic
life and recreational activities like fishing, than in 1991, and this
is due in no small part to the so-called "upgrading" in "drainage
improvement works".

9.The Green Plan calls for waterways to be
made aesthetic, and tropical coastal rivers (all the rivers in
Singapore are coastal) without mangroves look about as beautiful as
parks without trees. Mangroves are of tremendous ecological
importance as up to 75% of commercially caught sea fish depend on
mangroves directly or indirectly at some stage in their life cycle.
Planting back just a few mangroves along our riverbanks may not
drastically increase our supply of seafood, but it will make rivers
look nicer and attract more fish, crabs, birds, and other wildlife to
those places.

Many tidal
canals used to be mangrove-lined rivers before they were concretised.
Some of these could support a few mangrove trees and nypah (attap)
palms planted along their banks, if the vertical concrete banks were
made into breathable sloping banks; or alternatively, mangroves could
grow in accumulated mud banks inside the canals.

As for the
species to plant, Rhizophora and Bruguiera propagules
do best as they are bigger and hardier to begin with.
Avicennia propagules and seedlings tend to get broken and
washed away by strong currents during storms and should only be
planted in more sheltered situations. However even the stick-like
Rhizophora seedlings are easily bent and damaged by snagging
jetsam in the current, of which the worst offenders are plastic bags.
For this reason, it is best to use PVC planting tubes as detailed in
http://www.mangrove.org/

FURTHER
READING:

PRINTED
MATERIALS:

The
Singapore Green Plan: towards a tropical city of excellence. by
Ministry of the Environment, SNP, 1992.

DRAFT
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT for an Accessible Fishing Facilityhttp://www.nps.gov/noca/fishfacility.htm
An example of an environmental impact study on a proposed fishing
facility at an American lake. It shows the kinds of factors that
should be taken into account when considering such a
proposal.

Singapore's
national report for the 1992 UN Conference on Environment and
Development Preparatory Committeehttp://igc-vif-215.igc.org/wdces/si91_433.html
"According to this report, Singapore has a model of clean
development to offer the developing world." However, the
report abstract notes that there was "insufficient protection
of nature reserves and biodiversity." This highlights a
serious deficiency in Singapore's otherwise highly-praised
environmental record.

A Viable
Framework for Stewardshiphttp://www.greenplans.com/gparchive/wbus-ac.html
"The failure to reconcile environmental stewardship and
economic development in the industrialised world has its roots in
a longstanding intellectual and ideological gulf between business
and industry and the environmental movement. The former has tended
to view environmental issues through the lens of profits,
productivity, and economic growth, while the latter has based its
concerns on intrinsic values, aesthetic sensibility, and the
rights of future generations." -- This dichotomy of views is
very obvious in Singapore. The dominance of the one over the other
is equally obvious.

Ubin
Uncoveredhttp://community.s-one.net.sg/articles/23092000-1/story3.htm
"Prime Minister Goh Chok Tong who visited the island in 1990,
succumbed to its charms and recommended that the island be kept as
it was. The PM had also supported the National Youth Council's
proposal that Ubin be designated as 'The Adventure Island'. Then,
in the Singapore Green Plan of 1993, Ubin was also designated as a
'Nature Area'." An interesting article on Ubin.